Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

TikTok says it is restoring service for U.S. users

nbcnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

801–810 of 1001 posts

Re: TikTok says it is restoring service for U.S. users

#801

Post by realusername »

nemothekid wrote: post #743
lumost wrote: post #266

This seems to imply that the president elect can make unilateral guarantees contravening US law. That’s a surprising outcome.

> That’s a surprising outcome. It's President Trump, what are you going to do about it? The man has been regularly breaking the law since 2016 and there is never any political will to stop him. Trump v. U.S. established it's not illegal when Trump does it.

I feel like Americans didn't realize that the country slipped into a mixed authoritarian regime now.

As any other mixed authoritarian regime, the laws matter somewhat but are also balanced with the intent of the guy on the top.

And I did say authoritarian, not dictatorship, those aren't the same level. There's a lot of shades of black between Norway and China.

Re: TikTok says it is restoring service for U.S. users

#802

Post by kelseydh »

scarab92 wrote: post #774
appleorchard46 wrote: post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Has there been any other behavior like this in the past where a company "shut themselves down" to make a big political statement and then almost immediately undid the shut down? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_shutdowns_in_the_Un...

Fiduciary responsibilities make it unlikely that many companies would risk it. There’s always a chance you don’t come back, and there’s likely to be a loss of marketshare for simply being unavailable for a period and forcing users to trial alternatives. But, TikTok is not purely commercially focused. A majority of the voting stock of ByteDance is held by the Chinese government, who clearly see non-financial strategic…

Can you imagine any other country making this demand and it being taken seriously? It is negotiation by means of extortion. Why are American tech companies entitled to the profits of an internationally used app?

Re: TikTok says it is restoring service for U.S. users

#803

Post by eslaught »

ttul wrote: post #790
lumost wrote: post #266

This seems to imply that the president elect can make unilateral guarantees contravening US law. That’s a surprising outcome.

Here’s the law: https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/7521... No, Trump can’t legally postpone or give reprieve to TikTok. The time has passed for that. Once Congress has enacted a statute and the President has signed it into law, the executive branch must enforce it. An executive order cannot override or suspend a duly passed law unless Congress included an explicit waiver or suspension provision i…

Surely this is not the first case of a president not enforcing a law.

So then presumably this goes back into court, and then what?

Re: TikTok says it is restoring service for U.S. users

#804

Post by elfbargpt »

freeopinion wrote: post #762
elfbargpt wrote: post #381

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's obvious that US lawmakers were somehow convinced ByteDance would absolutely divest from TikTok if threatened with an ultimatum. They were never prepared for an actual ban and the resulting fallout. Now that it's obvious they won't divest (which should have been obvious the entire time), they flipped

Can you point to a lawmaker who has flipped?

Here's what Chuck Schumer said:

"It's clear that more time is needed to find an American buyer and not disrupt the lives and livelihoods of millions of Americans of so many influencers who have built up a good network of followers" [1]

The deal was divest or ban, not look for "more time to find a buyer". My point is they were never prepared for an actual ban.

[1] https://x.com/kenklippenstein/status/1880007290830688609

Re: TikTok says it is restoring service for U.S. users

#805

Post by throwaway199956 »

IAmGraydon wrote: post #793
shihab wrote: post #8

Is anyone aware of any opinion poll among US population about banning tiktok? This to me feels like one of the issues with potentially largest disconnect between voters and politicians Edit: found one from Pew. "The share of Americans who support the U.S. government banning TikTok now stands at 32%." Sept 05, 2024. In contrast, 87% US lawmakers voted for the law that caused this.

The problem with a poll is that the general public is likely not privy to all the information that the people in charge have. I think the best thing to do here is just come out with all of it, lay it on the table, and see what the public thinks then. If you have a good reason then show us.

That is exactly what the government has not done all these years. Why be tight-lipped if there is solid evidence and data, its not some issue of nuclear weapons/military-strategy.

Re: TikTok says it is restoring service for U.S. users

#806

Post by rapjr9 »

Large corporations blackmailing countries seems to be becoming more common. There was probably some of it going on throughout history (oil companies?, pharma?) but recently we've seen AT&T, Pornhub, TikTok, Google, Meta and others threaten to or actually stop services in areas that try to regulate them. There has been no legal reaction to this so far, rather companies "voluntarily" leave. Might we see large corporations seized in the future for blackmail?

Re: TikTok says it is restoring service for U.S. users

#807

Post by karmajuney »

While it’s back in the US, it seems to be a separate version from the rest of the world. My account is European and I can no longer log in within the US without a VPN out of the country. My GFs account is American and she can login but has lost access to some accounts and the ability to watch livestreams which my version of the app still has. I wonder if the 13 hour “outage” was for a larger scale data migration for a separate US version

Re: TikTok says it is restoring service for U.S. users

#808

Post by blackeyeblitzar »

karmajuney wrote: post #807

While it’s back in the US, it seems to be a separate version from the rest of the world. My account is European and I can no longer log in within the US without a VPN out of the country. My GFs account is American and she can login but has lost access to some accounts and the ability to watch livestreams which my version of the app still has. I wonder if the 13 hour “outage” was for a larger scale data migration for…

If so, all the more reason to distrust and ban this product. They’ve clearly not been honest with the public.

Re: TikTok says it is restoring service for U.S. users

#809

Post by rottencupcakes »

Rapzid wrote: post #452

I guess we know now why TikTok voluntarily went dark. Wonder which companies will be assured by TikTok's assurances there will be no consequences for helping them break the law. I just hope this causes congress to dig their heels in again. Almost can't believe what I'm seeing.

It would only take 38% of Republicans in the Senate to vote with Democrats to remove Trump from office to get him out of politics for good.

Defying the literal law on a matter of national security certainly qualifies as treason, or at least a vague "high crime and misdemeanor."

Now that he's done his job for the Republicans (delivered a red wave), is there any benefit to keeping a kleptocratic monster in power?

Should Congress just remove him from office and let JD Vance be president?

Edit: Not sure why being downvoted. China bots?

Re: TikTok says it is restoring service for U.S. users

#810

Post by tomnipotent »

rapjr9 wrote: post #806

Large corporations blackmailing countries seems to be becoming more common. There was probably some of it going on throughout history (oil companies?, pharma?) but recently we've seen AT&T, Pornhub, TikTok, Google, Meta and others threaten to or actually stop services in areas that try to regulate them. There has been no legal reaction to this so far, rather companies "voluntarily" leave. Might we see large corporati…

Private companies are not obligated to offer services, and in the US the government cannot compel private companies to do so (except rare circumstances). "We will stop offering services if X does not happen" is not coercive, it's an ultimatum. Companies should not be expected to operate in a market hostile to them.
Post reply on HN